= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
nerzhin comments on Undiscriminating Skepticism - Less Wrong
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (1329)
Consciousness. Basically, I want to know if there is a reflective "experiencer" there to care about. If not, I don't give the thing moral standing.
Your cryonically frozen brain presents an odd situation, because the experiencer is sort of "paused." But I think it's still clear that in killing that brain you're ending somebody's (conscious) life prematurely.
I like this discussion for its own sake, but I am curious: do you disagree with something I've said? Or are we just monkeying with scenarios for the sheer hell of it? (Not that that is in any way a bad thing - they are lots of fun.)
If I understand you correctly, you are arguing that the suspended brain is concious (just "paused", as you say). So there is some property of a system that we can call "concious" even if it's asleep, suspended, etc., and that embryos (before 20 weeks or so) lack this property.
If this a fair statement, I don't have anything more to say. The infants, animals etc. stuff is being covered in the "infanticide" sub-thread on this page.
Mostly we're monkeying with scenarios for the fun of it. I have somewhat less certainty than you about embryonic stem cell research - I estimate some chance that it is morally problematic.